International Assistance granted to the property until 2005

Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2005

In response to the Committee’s request by Decision 28 COM 14B.36 paragraphs 3 and 4, the State Party provided comprehensive supplementary information, consisting of both a phased action plan, and a map section. Recalling that the legal protection remains a key issue to ensure the coherent legal protection of the property’s cultural qualities, confirmation was received that this legal protection is now almost in place and that this will specifically apply to cultural landscapes. The Valley represents a link between culture and nature and constitutes a coherent unit with aesthetic, cultural and natural values. The decree was published in an official bulletin in January 2005 and remains open for comments for three months from April until June. After that period, subject to addressing comments raised, the Minister will recommend that the decree be adopted.

The report from the State Party provides updated information on the work to comply with the Committee’s requests as follows:

a) The State Party informed the Centre that the extension of the buffer-zone to include the plateau west of Pic Negre to Camp Ramonet will be confirmed once the negotiations with the Municipality of Sant Julia de Loria, following the inscription as cultural landscape, are settled

b) A better definition of the zones of the Valley is currently in progress for agricultural uses to support conservation and ecological objectives of built and natural assets;

c) Work has been initiated on a detailed inventory of built structures and archaeological remains on the property. ICOMOS evaluated the inventory carried out as detailed and comprehensive: the summary provides a very useful overview of the results, which could be useful in disseminating the record more widely; and

d) It is confirmed that work on an access strategy will be part of the implementation of the Management Plan. Access is a key issue for the property, as it involves considering ways in which several different types of access can be achieved without compromising the qualities of the Valley. In particular, an access strategy needs to address the sometimes conflicting interests of visitors, property owners, builders, farmers who want access to grazing grounds and forestry workers.

The lack of a road in the Valley has been one of the factors allowing it to maintain its qualities. When ICOMOS/IUCN carried out its assessment there was a very beneficial discussion with landowners on these issues. It was suggested that the State Party address this issue through the creation of an overall access strategy and provide the necessary access without the need for a regular road for motorized vehicles. At the time of the evaluation mission, the State Party was already considering alternative forms of transport that might be applicable.

29COM7B.71

Madriu-Perafita-Claror Valley (Andorra)

3. Thanks the State Party of Andorra for having submitted a comprehensive update as requested;

4. Notes that the legal protection has been addressed through a decree which ensures the protection of both natural and cultural values of the Valley, and that the decree is to be adopted in June 2005;

5. Requests the State Party to inform the World Heritage Centre about the implementation of the management plan and on the adoption of the decree on the legal protection of the property and its implementation, by 1 February 2006 at the latest.

3.Thanks the State Party for having submitted a comprehensive update as requested;

4.Notes that the legal protection has been addressed through a decree which ensures the protection of both natural and cultural values of the Valley, and that the decree is to be adopted in June 2005;

5.Requests the State Party to keep the World Heritage Centre informed on the implementation of the Management Plan and on the adoption of the decree on the legal protection of the property and its implementation by 1 February 2006 at the latest.

* :
The threats indicated are listed in alphabetical order; their order does not constitute a classification according to the importance of their impact on the property.
Furthermore, they are presented irrespective of the type of threat faced by the property, i.e. with specific and proven imminent danger (“ascertained danger”) or with threats which could have deleterious effects on the property’s Outstanding Universal Value (“potential danger”).